YVR-Canada Line and REM

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1ouk0VifwM&t=42s Even if the YVR-Canada Line had to initially be built as a symbolically small city train, urban transportation infrastructure can be designed in ways that can double or even triple capacity to meet future demand. Unfortunately, its very difficult to build anything in BC with significant future capacity in mind.

Ultimately, the YVR-Canada Line should have had level station clearances to eventually be able to accommodate 10 car trains. Unfortunately, in typical backwards BC planning the stations weren't even designed with enough level clearance to accommodate 5 car trains. The joke that is the Canada Line only has a level station clearance of 50m to eventually accommodate just a 2.5 car train. 

Most other cities actually build long stations to accommodate long trains right in the first place. Or, at least allow for enough level clearance so that the stations can eventually be doubled or tripled in length. 

The YVR-Canada Line should have started with the Vancouver & Richmond segment, then the Vancouver and Horseshoe+Bay+ferry+terminal segment. Then finally, the YVR to Delta and the Tsawwassen+ferry+terminal. 

The SkyTrain Stations in Greater Vancouver https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qg78Bmf1fk

Unfortunately, proper big city transportation planning is very difficult to achieve in backwards BC. So much is watered down in Vancouver.

Montreal’s Biggest REM Expansion Yet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G1oeIAfxDU&t=106s 

The Montreal REM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9O6RzsXIqQ 

While the REM was designed to help the Metro, it should have the capability to be gradually expanded. Eventually, REM trains should be lengthened from 4 car trains to 6 and even 8 car trains. 

In contrast, every Skytrain line should have been designed with enough level future station clearance to eventually accommodate a train as long as a 152.5 (500 ft.) long Montreal Metro train. The first 2 Skytrain lines have 80m stations and the joke that is the Canada Line only has 50m stations. 

While the first 2 lines can accommodate 5 car trains, the C Line wasn't designed to accommodate 5 car trains. Just 2.5 car trains, someday. 

Despite there being such a symbolic push for Vancouver to keep having short trains, narrow bridges and stumpy buildings, things are gradually changing in backwards BC. The Vancouver or BC Mind Virus should have been challenged decades ago, but too many loud people wanted to perpetuate the, KEEP THINGS SMALL AND INDEQUATE agenda.

Given how most of the bridges in Greater Vancouver are so narrow, there isn't enough room for proper bus and HOV lanes, or even wide emergency lanes. One would think that at least the trains & stations would have been designed to eventually be doubled or tripled in length. But that would go against the mutigenerational congestive planning agenda. That's why there still is only a 3 lane LGB when there should have been at least a parallel bus, HOV and train tunnel. The Pattullo+Bridge replacement didn't open with 2 bus and 2 HOV lanes, not even wide shoulders or emergency lanes. NW really likes the congestive planning approach. Of course the new tunnel between Richmond and Delta won't have an additional provision for a train tube. This will also help to perpetuate the congestive transportation mandate. 

Fortunately, Selective_door_operation technology can eventually allow more sensible transportation planners to enable longer trains. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_door_operation#International_variations , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdH5d1ZthmM 

This means that a 5 car Skytrain (85m) could eventually become a 7 car train, despite the 80m stations. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)_rolling_stock#Alstom_Mark_V Thus, an 80m train can become a 117m train.

A two car and 2.5 car (50m) train on the multibillion dollar Canada Line is so absurd and inept! With some slight station modifications, there could be a potential to eventually accommodate three, 20m cars at such short platforms. Then, once 3 car trains could become possible, its just a matter of having an extra 20m car at both ends of each train. A 5 car train of 100m is so much better than a 50m joke of a train. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_(Vancouver)#Alstom_Mark_V_fleet 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=SkyTrain-Canada+Line

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=REM

Why the Widest Freeway on Earth still Made Traffic Worse in Houston

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMwKgT4ZUvQ It is utterly foolish to not have enough space for a commuter train to run above, or in the middle or underneath the widest highways. 

https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/houstons-15-year-growth-three-charts Simply building wide roads like in Houston, L.A. and Toronto is just as bad as having mostly narrow bridges in Greater Vancouver.  

Whether its 10 lanes or 20 lanes wide, there should always be 2 dedicated bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes. While the highway will get clogged up during the day, at least the buses and trains can still get through quickly. 

The Pattullo+Bridge+replacement is only 2 lanes each way with narrow shoulders. It should have opened with enough space for 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes, but that would go against the congestive urban planning mentality of BC.

The Samuel-De+Champlain+Bridge in Montreal is just as good as similar wide highway and train bridges in Seattle+and+Perth. All were possible, simply because they aren't limited by anything like the Vancouver and BC Mind Virus.

The narrow-minded Vancouver and BC approach is to try to funnel everything into just 2 or 3 lanes each way. Then there just isn't enough space to have 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes. Greater Vancouver has certainly gone in the extreme opposite direction of Houston, L.A. and Toronto...

A wide Greater Houston highway has lots of space, but without 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes, everything gets plugged up. In contrast, Greater Vancouver has most of its bridges and highways so damn narrow, there isn't enough space to accomodate a proper express bus and HOV network. 

This deliberate backwards BC bottleneck-chokepoint planning approach is totally absurd. 

There is no commuter train tunnel near the Lions+Gate+Bridge or even for the Massey+Tunnel+replacement. Thus, they are the best examples of BC choke-point urban planning. Despite having twice the lanes as the inept 3 lane LGB, the newer Iron+Bridge never had any emergency lanes. A bus and HOV bridge was never built next to it. Plus, no commuter train bridge. It's another fine example of BC choke-point, bottleneck planning. 

A north and south Boundary+Road bridge system would provide direct access between the North+Shore, Richmond+and+Delta, but that's what a proper big city would do. Backwards BC has quite a problem with thinking and building big. The 2 car Canada+Line is another example. Don't build it to at least have a 5 car train, just design it to only have 2.5 car trains, someday.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Houston#Transportation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_610_(Texas)#Lane_configurations There is a point when simply adding more lanes won't provide long-term improvement. However, when combined with dedicated bus and HOV lanes, other options become available. Especially, if there is rail rapid transit and commuter rail as well. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/METRORail While not as extentise as DART_rail, it still works like a tram-train. 

Of course longer streetcars or tram-trains are still slow on the actual surface street segments.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trams_in_Melbourne#System_upgrades 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto_streetcar_system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muni_Metro SF

Major expansion of B.C. Highway 1 in Fraser Valley to begin soon

 https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/bc-highway-1-fraser-valley-expansion Ideally, the section from Horseshoe Bay to Hope shouldn't be a hopeless joke. A main highway in an urban region of over 3 million people should have at least 3 general lanes each way. Plus, a rapid bus lane and a HOV lane each way, but that would be at least 5 lanes each way. 

https://transcanadahighway.com/british-columbia/bc-highway-itinerary-horseshoe-bay-to-hope When a highway is only 2-3 lanes each way, it's too damn narrow to accomodate 2 bus lanes and 2 HOV lanes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_Highway_1#Lower_Mainland_section 

BC Hwy 1 - Trans-Canada Highway, Vancouver, BC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uf9QTmnxkqw

Vancouver, Burnaby and NW

Why People Hate Living in Vancouver (and want to move away) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzyITR89-3s 

Vancouver, Burnaby and NW is the city, although they are 3 separate municipalities. 

Burnaby, BC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqB1UXuXclc&t=265s

Why Greater Toronto Has Several Skylines

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI9WJa9Q8dA 

Of course many large urban areas around the world have more than 1 or 2 skylines or tower clusters. 

For the longest time, no building in Vancouver or BC, was allowed to be as tall as the 1930s CIBC tower, which is now a stump.

https://www.blogto.com/city/2017/05/toronto-lost-observation-deck-commerce-court-north/

https://www.torontojourney416.com/canadian-bank-of-commerce-building/ 

https://www.25king.ca/the-history 

It wasn't until the early 1970s when stumpy, Vancouver allowed a building to be taller than the L.A. City Hall, or the Smith Tower in Seattle. 

The 1930s CIBC tower, the L.A. City Hall and the Smith Tower, would still be prominent towers in Vancouver, but stumps in their own cities. 

Despite Vancouver being divided by an inlet and a river, the city wasn't able to build a huge wall along Boundary Road. Thus, the KEEP THEM OUT agenda was a little thwarted. The various White city councils tried to do the next best thing. That was to symbolically impose various restrictions as a reluctance to think, plan and build on a BIG city scale. The time especially from 1960 to 2000 had predominantly White City Hall and its councils continually impose several overlapping restrictions. 

Since Vancouver can't control immigration or the movements of non-white people, keeping things small and backwards, means that less people will move there than to Toronto, Montreal, Calgary and Edmonton. However, with a mild winter climate, more and more people want to move to backwards BC, especially small-minded Vancouver and provincial Victoria. 

In spite of immigration and Multiculturalism, Vancouver was to perpetually promote its small scale agenda. 

While the first Skytrain line can finally run 5 car trains, the stations weren't designed to become long enough to eventually accomodate 9 car trains like the big city Montreal Metro has. 

The 2nd and 3rd Skytrain lines are still only running 2 car joke trains. Running 8-10 car trains is what a proper big city would do, but not backwards Vancouver. 

Narrow bridges provides strong symbolism of the cities narrow-mindedness. When bridges are too narrow, its difficult to have a proper express or rapid bus system. The reluctance to build parallel bus and HOV bridges helps to maintain the congestive planning approach that is vancouver and the Greater Region. 

Vancouver's refusal to build parallel bike bridges has meant that 2 lanes were removed from the Burrard Bridge, 1 lane from the Cambie Bridge and 2 lanes from the Granville Bridge. 

Keeping buildings symbolically short when compared to what scenic Sydney, Auckland, SF and Seattle allow, also helps to maintain Vancouver's reluctance to enter the big and tall urban scale. In fact, the scenic setting that Vancouver is in has been used as the main excuse to continually scale the city down. Yet, several scenic cities around the world are either able to have wider bridges, wider roads, longer trains or taller buildings. 

The world is mostly composed of non-white people. Canada has less than 1% of the world's population and stubborn Vancouver symbolically remains as a small provincial backwater on the Pacific Rim. 

https://centralparktower.com.au Unlike Perth, Vancouver forbids 50 story office towers and Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne size residential towers. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/108_St_Georges_Terrace In fact, no office building in Vancouver has been permitted to have a 40th floor. However, since Burnaby and Surrey aren't under the restrictive controls of Vancouver, they will eventually allow office towers over 40 stories. 

Despite Australia having less people than Canada, Perth is allowed to have taller buildings, wider bridges and longer trains than Vancouver. Taller buildings, wider bridges and longer trains are even less likely in Halifax than whats in Brisbane or Queensland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q1_(building) To see buildings on a similar scale of what Brisbane allows, one has to get to Greater Toronto. Brisbane is allowed to have some buildings that would even be impressive in Melbourne and Sydney. 

While Montreal is allowed to have taller buildings than Vancouver, Montreal isn't allowed to have Sydney size towers. Especially not on the scale of what Melbourne and Toronto permit. 

Why Living in Vancouver, BC Has Become Impossible

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puM93PmmWbI  

People are leaving Toronto and Vancouver in record numbers https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0Jh0EymI_A

Moving From Canada to the U.S. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJAA1D_7lCs

Perth, WA, Australia

 https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/travel-information/driving-in-wa/driving-in-perth 

https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/technical-commercial/smartfreeways While WA take a spart aproach, backwards BC still takes a dumb approach to things.

https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/projects-initiatives/all-projects/metropolitan/smartfreeways/ 4 lanes each way with 2 track in the middle. You won't find that in Vancouver or anywhere in backwards BC. 

https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/projects-initiatives/all-projects/metropolitan/canning-bridge-bus-interchange 

https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/technical-commercial/smartfreeways/how-to-use-a-smfy/making-way-for-emergency-vehicles

https://www.mainroads.wa.gov.au/projects-initiatives/all-projects/metropolitan In contrast, the Metro Vancouver Region is a joke!  

"Perth is Australia’s fourth biggest city, with a population of 2.3 million. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhS-fiJ14GU Perhaps surprisingly, Perth has an expansive suburban railway network. 8 lines, 85 stations and 270 km of track – it’s a large system for a relatively small city." 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Perth

The Tacoma, Washington streetcar

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJVJeYrWEoQ  

Of course Tacoma, Seattle and Portland would all get some of their streetcar routes back long before slow moving Vancouver, BC ever will.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Translink/comments/1pu7jix/i_so_desperately_wish_theyd_just_build_this/

The Q Line streetcar in Detroit, Michigan

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9BIvioNjtg  

Not a problem for Michigan, but very difficult to revive in the BC part of Canada.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Translink/comments/1pu7jix/i_so_desperately_wish_theyd_just_build_this/

The Great SkyTrain upgrade (potential)

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D2CXdZ_4Ro 

Unfortunatly, the first 2 Skytrain lines were designed to only have 80m stations and trains. The 3rd line to YVR and Richmond was only designed to have 50m stations. In contrast, the Montreal Metro has stations long enough to accomodate 152.4m long trains. Thus, the greatest mistake was to not enable the Skytrain to eventually become a very high capacity train system. Combine that with mostly narrow bridges and roads in Greater Vancouver and you have the epitome of congestive urban planning. 

At least by late 2025 some of the new 5 car trains were out, along with some of the old 6 car little box trains on the 1st line. The 2nd and 3rd lines are still running 2 car joke trains, but that symbolically fits right in with the, KEEP BC SMALL AND BACKWARDS mentality. 

A proper big city long-term plan would have been to allow for 10 car trains, with at least 5-6 car trains at the start when each line opened.

Mild Victoria, BC

Victoria has been a provincial backwater for most of its history. Despite being in a mild winter setting, it's so small when compared to Edmonton, Winnipeg, Quebec City and Halifax. 

https://victoria.citified.ca/news/35-storey-one-victoria-place-mixed-use-tower-unveiled-blanshard-st-pandora-ave

https://www.onevictoriaplace.ca 

https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=37&status=15  

While Edmonton was eventually allowed to have a tall building, even by Toronto, Calgary and Montreal standards, Victoria was always supposed to have shorter buildings than Winnipeg, Quebec City and Halifax. That's part of the KEEP THINGS SMALL mentality on V. Island. 

Victoria should have had its first LRT line by now, but that might improve urban mobility. Eventually, Victoria and Nanaimo will merge into one linear urban area. Eventually, the Comox_Valley_Regional_District will have over 100,000 people, the Regional_District_of_Nanaimo will have over 200,000 people, the Cowichan_Valley_Regional_District will exceed 100,000 people and the Capital_Regional_District will have over 450,000 people. 

Of course there doesn't seem to be any big regional scale planning from Sooke to Courtenay. Perhaps the island's urban planners will wait until there is 800,000 and over a million residents on the island.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver_Island#Demographics 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_Rail_Corridor#Vancouver_Island_Transportation_Corridor_Coalition

So, as more people discover that Victoria and Vancouver are the mildest winter cities in Canada, more people just might want to move there. Especially, when Canadian Snowbirds don't feel as comfortable with Florida, Texas & California.  

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=population+growth

Four Lane Pattullo Bridge Replacement Project

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-ING5Pfrdk 

The old bridge has 4 narrow lanes and no traffic divider. However, the new bridge won't have any bus or HOV lanes and no emergency lanes. 

Chokepoint-bottleneck planning remains firmly entrenched in backwards BC.

Driving over the Pattullo Bridge replacement

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwwOqxqzNrQ 

It's great symbolism with opening the bridge with just 1 lane. In 1800s backwater BC, it was amazing just to have a wagon road anywhere. Well the new bridge, when it's fully open,will have 2 wagon roads each way, just like the old bridge. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0EeyJmmpuM 

Partial opening of the Pattullo Bridge replacement

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDFkc9Oa-j0 

Unfortunatly, the old bridge is such bad shape that it can't be refurbished. Otherwise, each bridge could have provided 3 or 4 lanes each way. People will be in for a shock once the old bridge is dismantled. Then the new bridge will become just another classic 4 lane BC bottleneck-chokepoint. 

No bus lanes or HOV lanes and especially no wide emergency lanes. 

https://jfdatalinks.blogspot.com/search?q=Pattullo+Bridge

History of the Pattullo Bridge in BC

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mw934knFUgc Such a very narrow 4 lane bridge that just wasn't properly designed for future capacity. 

The new (4 lane) cable-stayed bridge to replace the old 1937 Pattullo Bridge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHzr0ZSIcfo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_crossings_of_the_Fraser_River#Main_Watercourse_(New_Westminster_to_Yellowhead_Pass)

History of the Port Mann Bridge in BC

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4aYxObfjJ8 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Mann_Bridge#Original_bridge The original PMB had only 2 lanes each way with no emergency lanes or wide shoulders. It was designed to be a classic BC bottleneck-chokepoint right from the start. Eventually, a 5th lane was squeezed in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Mann_Bridge#Opposition_to_twinning_plan While bridge duplication isn't that big of a problem in Australia or the US, it is in the BC part of Canada. Australia is allowed to have 3 proper big cities on the Pacific. Thus, the urban scale of infrastructure in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane are much larger than what's allowed in the Greater Vancouver Region. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_Mann_Bridge#New_bridge Given that this is supposed to be part of the main East-West highway in Canada, a significantly wider bridge was eventually approved. While it was designed with a provision for a potential future rail line, there should have also been a provision for a lower deck. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_crossings_of_the_Fraser_River#Main_Watercourse_(New_Westminster_to_Yellowhead_Pass)

Is Victoria, BC North America's Cycling Capital?

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKMDMekErQ0

Some Canada Mega-projects Under Construction

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwsOVZ-j7hg 

Oakridge_Park is on a much smaller scale than Metrotown, Brentwood and Lougheed. It will especially be on a much smaller scale than Parramatta in NSW. 

Unfortunatly, the Oakridge-41st_Avenue_station was only designed to have 50m platforms, when it should have been at least 100m. Thus, the utter foolishness has meant that instead of allowing for a future level station clearance to accomodate 5 car trains, the Canada (embassament) Line was only designed to just have 2.5 car trains. While its extremely short stations might have been disguised as a cost saving measurer, there didn't seem to be any key people onboard to make sure that it could eventually become a proper big city train line. Its sad that a line which opened in 2009 is still only running 2 car trains. While the 2.5 car configuration is still a joke of a train, at least half of an extra coach-length is better than nothing. Plus, there should have been extra cars ordered by now so at least during the very busy times the trains could be operating at 1 minute headways. Unfortunatly, this goes against the Vancouver & BC congestion planning mentality.

Despite being built several years after the Sydney_Harbour_Bridge, the joke that is the Pattullo_Bridge was designed to only have 4 narrow lanes & only 1 sidewalk. Of course the replacement_bridge will only open with 2 lanes each way. It was as if someone really wanted to make sure that there won't be 2 bus lanes and no HOV lanes when the bridge opens. While the new bridge is designed to be expanded from a 4 lane joke to eventually having 6 lanes, it still won't be wide enough to accomodate 2 HOV lanes as well as 2 bus lanes. Of course the new bridge won't have any emergency lanes, just like the old bridge. However, it will have 2 bike lanes and 2 sidewalks. https://www.globalhighways.com/news/pattullo-bridge-completion-end-year Its only fitting that in backwards BC this new bridge wouldn't be designed to eventually have a lower deck to accomodate 2 bus lanes and 2 LRT tracks. 

If the planners were afraid to symbolically have a wide bridge between NW and Surrey, the old Pattullo_Bridge should have been designed to eventually have a lower deck for trams, trucks and busses. Even when the SkyBridge between NW and Surrey opened in 1990, it wasn't designed to have any bus lanes or emergency vehicle lanes and especially, no bike and footpaths. 

Is Vancouver the best city in North America? (2019) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8dmVUrNt38

 One of the biggest mistakes in Vancouver & SW BC is to have short trains combined with mostly narrow bridges. Thus, the region doesn't get to have long, high capacity trains and there isn't a proper regional network of bus-bridges. The refusal to twin most of the bridges means that it's almost impossible to have a proper and efficient regional network of rapid-bus and HOV lanes.  

While Montreal built the REM to augment their long-train Metro system, Vancouver should have allowed for enough clearance to eventually have 500 foot long trains. 80m-50m Skytrain stations are going to become inadequate, when there should have been a 152.4m provision so that the trains could eventually become as long as the ones on the Montreal Metro. 

Is Regional Rail in the Future of British Columbia? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PeIOVy6fFc

World’s Tallest Towers Comparison

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09pmnf8npA8 

There was a time when no structure in BC was allowed to be as tall as Blackpool Tower. Then there was a time when no building in Vancouver was allowed to be as tall as the Seattle Space needle or the Calgary Tower. Even in late 2025, only one Vancouver building has been allowed to be taller than the Calgary Tower. 

Burnaby, Coquitlam and especially Surrey, don't have such imposed height restrictions as stumpy Vancouver. Thus, Burnaby, Coquitlam and Surrey will all be having taller buildings than Vancouver.  

If Montreal can ever have its equivalent of La_Defense or Canary_Wharf, then it might be able to have some tall buildings that would be impressive by Melbourne and Toronto standards. Perhaps even Chicago or NYC standards. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Defense 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canary_Wharf

Broadway Subway Construction as of November 2025

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uot7oIA9-ZE The station platforms will be 80m, which can only accomodate a 5 car train.

Unfortunatly, even if this segment had 500' or 152.4m long stations like the Montreal Metro, the rest of the first 2 lines only have 80m stations. Thus, 80m is only about 52% of the length of a Montreal Metro station, which can accomodate 9 car trains. It's taken until 2025 for the SkyTrain to gradually start running 5 car trains. In theory, if two Vancouver 80m trains run at twice the frequency as one 152m Montreal Metro train, a similar capacity could be attained. 

However, in the long run, it would have been much more cost effective to have the first 2 SkyTrain lines stations already roughed out to 152m, or a least have enough level clearance to eventually become twice the length. But that's what a proper big city would do, something that Vancouver is against.   

Even as an initial cost saving measure, the YVR-Canada Line should have opened with 100m stations, instead of the inadequate 50m joke. Then it could immediately accomodate 5 car trains. The station platforms should have had enough level clearance to eventually accommodate a 160m long train consisting of 8 cars reaching both ferry terminals. Of course there seems to be no plan to connect YVR to both ferry terminals.

Its very difficult for BC cities to allow proper big city size infrastructure, because that would symbolize a pro growth initiative. Since the world is mostly composed of non-white people, a slow growth agenda became a clever way to symbolically demonstrate a refusal to build big. BC is multicultural, but Canada has less than 1% of the worlds population. Even in the 2020s, BC still retains some of its colonial outpost mentality. Just keep things small and backwards and try to remain a backwater for as long as possible.